netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Patch: Make linkwatch more robust against rtnl holders

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Patch: Make linkwatch more robust against rtnl holders
From: Stefan Rompf <srompf@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 17:44:21 +0100
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040218171159.62e76670.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <200402151511.49432.srompf@xxxxxx> <20040218171159.62e76670.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: KMail/1.6.1
Hi David,

> > the attached patch updates the linkwatch code so that it backs off and
> > retries whenever it cannot get the rtnl semaphore.
>
> I think we should fix locking conflicts created by things like what
> the sungem driver is doing instead.

On the other hand, I'm not aware of any convention when flush_scheduled_work() 
is allowed to be called. As long as anyone inside kernel space is can 
schedule work and anyone else can wait for completion, it does not hurt to 
make a schedule task less vulnerable to deadlocks.

Stefan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>